A person can think however they want. Actions, like many have said, define a person in the end. Someone can advocate for peace with malicious intent, but they will still likely be remembered for advocating peace and not for their impure motivations. If these contradicting images are revealed to the public, that is still an act against that person, and is no longer a thought.
However, this is only from the public's view. When it comes to people, they may as well be the embodiment of their thoughts. Everything is fueled by something. The same person who seeds their own goals under the guise of peace will not think of themselves as one who acts with the intentions of bringing peace. They will be looking to call forth whatever it is that they want, and be aware that what they present to the public is not the truth.
So, both points are arguable. It depends on whether you value the individual or the community. Actions are what are remembered, and thoughts are a person's reason. Even today, this comes into relevancy because people want to know why certain figures in history did what they did. Thoughts make a person human, after all. Without thought, seperation of man and beast would be nigh impossible. Without action, man would have been left behind long ago. Both thought and action are important indeed.
If you can name the plays And the sentence I could help
Answer:
I think the answer is D. A cliché is overused and uninteresting, while an archetype remains fresh because writers make it feel new.
⭐️The answer is ⭐️
MACBETH IS SET DURING A WAR between Scotland and Norway. At the start of the play the cries of the battle can be heard, but it is not soldiers that we are met with first, rather the ominous figures of three witches over a cauldron.
Answer:
what are we suppose to read
Explanation:
